rfcfanatic
Mercantilist
Sorry about the rant, but I really feel that way. When I say "City governor, I want you to build Wealth in this city. Now it's up to you to get the best out of it" then what actually happens is the opposite. The incompetent governor starts to work as little
as possible! And of course, when building Wealth does as little as reducing the negative run from -200
to -195
, it's easy to conclude: "Hey, this stuff is utterly useless! Even a Bank in a 5
city is mathematically more efficient (with all sliders at 0%)!". If it were not broken and the negative run went to -150
, of course I would be like: "Hey this stuff is really amazing!".
Of course, there is a way to manually manage tiles to overcome this. But why should I have to do the job of city governors and control every single tile in every one of my 20 cities? A CEO hires subordinates whose job is to deal with the little details so he would be less distracted from the bigger picture of company development. But if a subordinate happens to be incompetent, he would simply fire the subordinate and hire a more competent one.
Unfortunately in civ 4 there is no way to fire incompetent city governors
That's why I prefer Markets and Banks over building Wealth, because at least these are not broken 





Of course, there is a way to manually manage tiles to overcome this. But why should I have to do the job of city governors and control every single tile in every one of my 20 cities? A CEO hires subordinates whose job is to deal with the little details so he would be less distracted from the bigger picture of company development. But if a subordinate happens to be incompetent, he would simply fire the subordinate and hire a more competent one.
Unfortunately in civ 4 there is no way to fire incompetent city governors

